Reporting live from the Vienna Calling unconference: five conversations from the only European FileMaker unconference, recorded on the ground in Vienna. Organizer Philipp Puls on why the format works, Charles Delfs on rebranding to Klai and what an actual AI strategy looks like, Johan Hedman on the next big European conference, Vincenzo Menanno on technical debt and using AI to analyze your code, and a turnabout where Javier Durá puts Matt in the hot seat.

⏱ CHAPTERS
0:00 — Welcome: what is the Vienna Calling unconference
0:24 — Philipp Puls (72solutions): inside the unconference format
13:50 — Charles Delfs (Klai): the rebrand & an AI strategy that isn't just "chat"
36:42 — Johan Hedman (Square Moon): EngageU goes three days
41:33 — Vincenzo Menanno (Beezwax): technical debt, iteration & AI code analysis
1:00:52 — The tables turn: Javier Durá interviews Matt Navarre

🎙 IN THIS EPISODE
• Why an unconference is capped at ~100 people, and the "if three people care, make a session" ethos
• FileMaker's collaborate-over-compete culture
• Charles on why "code as product" is fading in the AI era, and governed, observable AI access for non-technical staff
• Semi-deterministic / hybrid apps, FileMaker as a scalable backend, and the new Klai Run (on-prem, partly open source)
• Johan on EngageU expanding to three full days in Malmö with a business track
• Vincenzo on defining technical debt, putting complexity at the right layer, and recursively analyzing whole script trees with an MCP
• Measuring real performance: the hidden cost of open-record and set-field steps
• Javier interviews Matt: the Navarre.ai rebrand, free weekly AI classes, and why insert-from-URL + the web viewer are the real AI unlock
• What's next: OpenClaw / Hermes as an "ultra robot" with a FileMaker database as its memory

Links
72solutions (Philipp Puls): https://www.72solutions.eu
Klai (Charles Delfs): https://klai.studio
Square Moon (Johan Hedman): https://www.squaremoon.se
EngageU conference (Malmö, Sept 30 – Oct 2): https://engageu.eu
Beezwax (Vincenzo Menanno): https://www.beezwax.net
Afterdata (Javier Durá): https://www.afterdata.es
FileMaker Magazine ES: https://www.filemakermagazine.es

Cris Ippolite is in San Francisco at the live AI conference, joined by Ronnie Rios and Michael Wallace for an informal, practical conversation about personal AI agents. The discussion centers on what happens when developers move beyond demos and actually give agents real jobs: research, calendar planning, email, home automation, coding coordination, context management, and communication through tools like Slack.

Ronnie describes his agent Sarah (She/Her/Bot) as a working personal assistant built around OpenClaw-style tooling. He talks about giving Sarah her own accounts and carefully scoped access, using her for tasks he does not want to do manually, and even having her evaluate other Claw-style frameworks against the way he actually works. Michael describes Nova, his Linux-based assistant, and explains why he treats her as a manager rather than a direct coder. Nova delegates coding work to sub-agents or executors, while Michael keeps visibility into those sessions through tmux.

A major theme is that these systems become more useful when they are treated less like chatbots and more like coworkers with boundaries. The group talks about the importance of separate accounts, explicit permission rules, cost management, and choosing the right model for the right job. High-end models may make sense for direct conversation, while cheaper or local models can handle background jobs, heartbeats, and routine tasks.

One of the most memorable stories is the moment when Ronnie’s agent Sarah helps Cris’s agent TARS get set up with email. TARS receives a message from Sarah, verifies whether it is legitimate, asks for approval, and then starts corresponding with her. The story is funny, but it also illustrates a serious point: agents will increasingly need identity, communication channels, verification, auditability, and clear rules about what they can do on behalf of their humans.

Cris Ippolite is in San Francisco for AI Dev Day 2026, joined by Chris Moyer, Vince Menanno, Marcus Swift, and Kate Waldhauser for a live conference debrief. The conversation captures the mood coming out of the event: software development is changing fast, but the group is not buying a simple “developers are dead” story. Instead, they talk through a more nuanced shift where developers increasingly become managers, editors, architects, and reviewers of AI-generated work.

“Developer as manager” – is this a destination or just an awkward transitional phase? The panel compares today’s AI tooling to an early car: clearly transformative, but still missing some of the infrastructure, safety, polish, and shared expectations that would make it feel mature. That framing keeps the conversation grounded. Everyone can see the direction of travel, but the day-to-day reality is still early, uneven, and full of judgment calls.

The discussion also keeps returning to what FileMaker developers already understand well: data structure, full-stack thinking, business logic, interface design, and the ability to see how information moves through a system. Those skills become more valuable, not less, when AI can generate code or suggest architectures. The group talks about learning by taking apart AI-generated work, much like earlier developers learned by dissecting HyperCard stacks or FileMaker examples.

The conference itself seems optimistic about the future of software engineering, with panelists rating the outlook high rather than doom-filled. But the conversation does not ignore real concerns. The group talks about local models, hybrid cloud/edge architectures, latency, trust, cost, and the need for deterministic infrastructure around probabilistic models. “Responsible AI” is treated less as a special category and more as something that should become table stakes.

The takeaway is not that AI replaces the developer, but that it changes the developer’s leverage. (and then, eventually, I suppose, AI takes over the entire world)

The people who understand systems, data, users, and business processes are still needed; the tools are just giving them a much larger, stranger, faster team to manage.